# C_2010179EN.01000701.xml

| 3.7.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 179/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.7.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 4 May 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands)) — TNT Express Nederland B.V. v AXA Versicherung AG

(Case C-533/08) (1)

(Judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters - Jurisdiction and recognition and enforcement of judgments - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Article 71 - Conventions concluded by the Member States in relation to particular matters - Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road (CMR))

(2010/C 179/10)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: TNT Express Nederland B.V.

Respondent: AXA Versicherung AG

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Interpretation of Article 71(1) and (2)(a) and (b), second subparagraph, of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (‘Brussels I’) (OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1) — Relationship with the Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road (CMR), signed at Geneva on 19 May 1956 — Lis pendens — Rules on concurrence

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | Article 71 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that, in a case such as the main proceedings, the rules governing jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement that are laid down by a convention on a particular matter, such as the lis pendens rule set out in Article 31(2) of the Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road, signed at Geneva on 19 May 1956, as amended by the Protocol signed at Geneva on 5 July 1978, and the rule relating to enforceability set out in Article 31(3) of that convention, apply provided that they are highly predictable, facilitate the sound administration of justice and enable the risk of concurrent proceedings to be minimised and that they ensure, under conditions at least as favourable as those provided for by the regulation, the free movement of judgments in civil and commercial matters and mutual trust in the administration of justice in the European Union (favor executionis). |
| --- | --- |

1.

Article 71 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that, in a case such as the main proceedings, the rules governing jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement that are laid down by a convention on a particular matter, such as the lis pendens rule set out in Article 31(2) of the Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road, signed at Geneva on 19 May 1956, as amended by the Protocol signed at Geneva on 5 July 1978, and the rule relating to enforceability set out in Article 31(3) of that convention, apply provided that they are highly predictable, facilitate the sound administration of justice and enable the risk of concurrent proceedings to be minimised and that they ensure, under conditions at least as favourable as those provided for by the regulation, the free movement of judgments in civil and commercial matters and mutual trust in the administration of justice in the European Union (favor executionis).

| 2. | The Court of Justice of the European Union does not have jurisdiction to interpret Article 31 of the Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road, as amended. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Court of Justice of the European Union does not have jurisdiction to interpret Article 31 of the Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road, as amended.

---

(1)  OJ C 44, 21.2.2009.

---